Scottish Prison Service (Email-A-Prisoner (EMAP) - failure to respond) [2023] ScotIC 001_2023 (11 January 2023)

The Scottish Prison Service failed to comply with its statutory duty to respond to the applicant's Freedom of Information request within the required timescale.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2023] ScotIC 001_2023
Parties: Respondent: Scottish Prison Service; Applicant: Applicant
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 11 January 2023
Procedural Posture: Freedom of Information Appeal / Decision by Scottish Information Commissioner
Outcome: Application upheld
Legal Topics: Failure to Respond to Information Request, Public Authority Obligations

Administrative Law Freedom of Information Failure to Respond to Information Request Public Authority Obligations

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2

Parties

Scottish Prison Service

Respondent

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Freedom of Information Appeal / Decision by Scottish Information Commissioner

Legal Issues

1 Whether the Scottish Prison Service failed to respond to a Freedom of Information request regarding Email-A-Prisoner (EMAP) within the statutory timescale

Ratio Decidendi

The Scottish Prison Service failed to comply with its statutory duty to respond to the applicant's Freedom of Information request within the required timescale.

Court Disposition

Application upheld

Orders

The Scottish Prison Service must respond to the applicant's request for information regarding Email-A-Prisoner (EMAP) in accordance with the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.